Bitmob - Classic games don't always hold up.No lie, some games simply don't age well. They were products of their time, and time moved on. The very first Tomb Raider revolutionized video games in several ways, and its rigid, on-the-grid puzzles and auto-aim gunfights were fun at the time. But when developer Crystal Dynamics remade it a decade later as Tomb Raider Anniversary, they upgraded the gameplay to reflect how I game now; modern designs, greater flexibility, more control. I loved playing Tomb Raider in 1997, but I couldn't go back to it now. I'd play the 2007 version instead.

Smellfinger wrote on Sep 29, 2012, 08:00:Why are we arguing about a series that wasn't very good to begin with? There are plenty of platformers from that era that deserve much more praise than Tomb Raider.

Such as..? The first two TR games were great for their time. The series got worse over time due to lack of evolution but the same applies to most long-running series. When it comes to pseudorealistic 3D platformers, Tomb Raider and Prince of Persia games are really the only ones worth mentioning.

I knew someone would complain about that, and almost took it out.You're 100% right, but I'm not a Tomb Raider fan. I dislike platforming. I wish Uncharted, especially the most recent, had less shooting and more exploring/puzzles, but I'm pretty happy I rarely had to line up jumps.So, to me, it's a similar game with better mechanics.

You probably would have been better off leaving it out. If you don't like platformers, you're not qualified to judge a Tomb Raider game. It's like judging Thief or Splinter Cell if you hate stealth games. Or X-COM if you hate turn-based strategy games.

Beamer wrote on Sep 28, 2012, 15:14:It's hard to go back to old games when newer games have done the same mechanics better. Like the Tomb Raider games - I'd much rather play Uncharted.

The old games I still play are ones that were never really topped. No one has done turn based as well as XCOM and JA2, so I still play those (but JA2 did everything JA1 did, only better, so JA1 is mostly dead to me.) I played Civ1 until Civ4 because I thought it was better than 2 and 3, but could never go back. If I had a working joystick I'd probably play Red Baron or Aces Over from time to time.

I am now slightly concerned that new XCOM may ruin old XCOM for me.

Please, please don't compare Tomb Raider to Uncharted. Uncharted is a shooter with platforming elements. Tomb Raider is a platformer with shooting elements. Different focuses, different games. Reducing the amount or dumbing down the platforming doesn't make it better. It just makes it more appealing to people who don't like platforming. Uncharted's platforming mechanics are extremely simplistic compared to TR's, as are the puzzles.

I knew someone would complain about that, and almost took it out.You're 100% right, but I'm not a Tomb Raider fan. I dislike platforming. I wish Uncharted, especially the most recent, had less shooting and more exploring/puzzles, but I'm pretty happy I rarely had to line up jumps.So, to me, it's a similar game with better mechanics.

From what I've played I don't think the new XCOM will kill the old ones. There's still stuff from Apocalypse that isn't even remotely touched upon in the new game. And with limited soldiers, lack of base attacks and a lack of inventory micromanagement, a lot of the difficulty is removed from the newest game. It still seems like a lot of fun, though.

Beamer wrote on Sep 28, 2012, 15:14:It's hard to go back to old games when newer games have done the same mechanics better. Like the Tomb Raider games - I'd much rather play Uncharted.

The old games I still play are ones that were never really topped. No one has done turn based as well as XCOM and JA2, so I still play those (but JA2 did everything JA1 did, only better, so JA1 is mostly dead to me.) I played Civ1 until Civ4 because I thought it was better than 2 and 3, but could never go back. If I had a working joystick I'd probably play Red Baron or Aces Over from time to time.

I am now slightly concerned that new XCOM may ruin old XCOM for me.

Please, please don't compare Tomb Raider to Uncharted. Uncharted is a shooter with platforming elements. Tomb Raider is a platformer with shooting elements. Different focuses, different games. Reducing the amount or dumbing down the platforming doesn't make it better. It just makes it more appealing to people who don't like platforming. Uncharted's platforming mechanics are extremely simplistic compared to TR's, as are the puzzles.

What a stupid idea for an article. I dont think anyone needed this spelled out for them.

When it comes to most media, there are plenty of examples of things that do, and don't age well.

If we took a sampling of movies from 2001, we could find one or two good ones that are going to hold up, the rest is all garbage, though it may have been lauded at the time. Same goes for music, so it's no shock to see it applied to other media.

Yeah that's a pretty weak premise for an article. Some games haven't aged well, is that a surprise? Production values, interface and interconnectivity are the main gains since the ninetees but you have a great deal of compromises too. Some ninetees games achieved over 5 or 10 years of replayability! How many games from this decade will manage that?

Of course you still get gems these days but in general the mainstream of modern gaming is more mass produced, less interactive, more dilute, more chaperoned, less finished and less owned than it used to be!

(Ahhh - I know that firmly defines me as old, crusty and predictable but it felt good!)

On the other hand, some games do age well. While I wouldn't want to suffer through the interface of Dune II, I booted up and played Total Annihilation (1996) last year, and it still plays great. The only thing I miss is the infinite zoom out from SupCom. And Quake II, Diablo II, & Alpha Centauri are all games I've played recently and gameplay is still great and the graphics get the job done even if they don't have specular highlights and per pixel lighting.

ON the other other hand, I'd not want to play Jane's Longbow 2, Ultima IV or V, Betrayal at Krondor, or anything like that. There gameplay would be just too clunky and the graphics too poor to impart an experience I'd expect with today's games.

It's hard to go back to old games when newer games have done the same mechanics better. Like the Tomb Raider games - I'd much rather play Uncharted.

The old games I still play are ones that were never really topped. No one has done turn based as well as XCOM and JA2, so I still play those (but JA2 did everything JA1 did, only better, so JA1 is mostly dead to me.) I played Civ1 until Civ4 because I thought it was better than 2 and 3, but could never go back. If I had a working joystick I'd probably play Red Baron or Aces Over from time to time.

avianflu wrote on Sep 28, 2012, 13:11:I played TR Anniversary and it had particularly terrible enemy AI that pretty much broke the game combat-wise. The super blurry textures in the remake didnt help either. TR's remake was not a good example to use in the article.

If you play TR for the combat, you're doing it wrong. TR: Anniversary was all about the puzzles and platforming (much like any other platformer) and in those regards, it was excellent.

I played TR Anniversary and it had particularly terrible enemy AI that pretty much broke the game combat-wise. The super blurry textures in the remake didnt help either. TR's remake was not a good example to use in the article.